Home Conservation Front

Why are commercial boats allowed to **** the gulf?

24

Replies

  • HighTidesDrifterHighTidesDrifter Posts: 105 Officer
    A good analogy would be to take a family of 5 people who are quite poor and have a very tight food budget every month. Rosie Odonnel suddenly decides to move in and is devouring much of what the poor family has. Is the dad going to say to his family, "we are just going to have to buckle down and come up with a better way to measure how much we are eating" or is he going to come to his senses and kick her out?
    Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    "The main vice of capitalism is the unequal distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the equal distribution of misery." -Winston Churchill
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,585 Captain
    Fletch wrote: »
    So what is it you have a beef with? Commercial fisherman "****" the Gulf or Jewfish?

    Again, and in the spirit of the title of this thread that you created, I think your rage is mis-targeted. Focus on getting the regulators to come up with an accurate way of measuring recreational harvest. We don't have this on the rec side at the moment and it is, in my opinion, one of the biggest reasons for the draconian measures being levied against us.

    No, the biggest reason for the draconian measures being levied against us is the scam called Catch Shares. In order to justify the implementation of this privatization scheme, they must create a "crisis" where none exists, ratcheting down our seasons/bag limits until we are willing to accept the so-called "solution" (Catch Shares).

    Now with Sector Separation, the charter captains are starting to realize that they are not going to be able to put their customers on the amount of fish that they have in the past. There will not be enough fish to go around. The solution? The commercial Sea Lords will "come to the rescue" and be more than happy to lease us "their" fish.

    Just wait and see.

    Until this Catch Share cancer is addressed and nuked, nothing will change regarding our access to the fishery. With the Trump administration coming into power, this is our best time to affect REAL change.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    My beef is with both. I only commented on the Jewfish because gettinwet brought it up as one of the factors impacting the fishery. Do they have quite as big of an impact as the commercials? Who knows. But I beg of you to answer me this. How is a "regulator keeping track of recreational harvest" going to keep a grouper or snapper ending up on a long line as part of 2,600 lbs of fish being dumped at a fish camp? :huh. Not to mention all the undersized fish which were discarded and all the bycatch as well.
    I wouldn't make a trip for 2600lbs, waste of time IMO
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • haydenfox!#$haydenfox!#$ Posts: 2,406 Captain
    Cut the commercial quota a %, raise the price of fish to make up for the cut - extend the season and bag limit for rec's, everybody's happy...
  • :blahblah
    THERE SHOULD BE NO COMMERCIAL FISHING ALLOWED FOR ANY SPECIES THAT IS CONSIDERED OVERFISHED.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    Cut the commercial quota a %, raise the price of fish to make up for the cut - extend the season and bag limit for rec's, everybody's happy...
    They did, rec TAC for ARS is now higher than commercial, gag season was extended to six months in 2016, and rec and commercial just received a 30% increase in red grouper TAC for 2017.
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • HighTidesDrifterHighTidesDrifter Posts: 105 Officer
    Cut the commercial quota a %, raise the price of fish to make up for the cut - extend the season and bag limit for rec's, everybody's happy...

    If this is the fix, would we have needed the gillnet ban then? We could still be putting up with severely depleted trout and redfish numbers. I don't know about you, but I would no way want to go back to those days.
    Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    "The main vice of capitalism is the unequal distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the equal distribution of misery." -Winston Churchill
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    If this is the fix, would we have needed the gillnet ban then? We could still be putting up with severely depleted trout and redfish numbers. I don't know about you, but I would no way want to go back to those days.
    Didn't need the gill net ban.
    You recs are still having trouble with red drum as FWC cut the bag limit back in the NW zone last spring.
    You really don't know what your talking about do you?
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • HighTidesDrifterHighTidesDrifter Posts: 105 Officer
    Don't have a clue, I've never gotten a lure wet in my life. :rotflmao. They were very recently talking about raising the bag limit in the SW region to two fish which could very easily be done right now. As our soon-to-be Commander in Chief would say, the redfish schools around here right now are "hyuuuuge"!
    Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    "The main vice of capitalism is the unequal distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the equal distribution of misery." -Winston Churchill
  • gettinwetgettinwet Posts: 1,366 Officer
    Gill net ban. Absolute must. I fished Crystal River with my grandfather who grew up fishing there before/after and saw first hand the decline and semi recovery. It not only killed most juvenile fish - you know the undersize schoolies - all the trapped grass that got dumped killed off half the oyster beds as well.

    But the current issues are the destruction/pollution of habitat, overpopulation, poor management practices, illegal fishing.........with the first two the primary concerns..........again from first hand observation. I have wade fished the MIWR in Titusville, Fl the past 15 years.........the cold spell a few years back might have actually been a blessing.........don't know what the algae bloom now would be like without it. Spots I used to fish that were gin clear most of the year except late summer and covered with grass are now muck bottoms under three feet of murkier water. And it is not just isolated to the Northern Indian River.............most of the grass beds all the way to Ft. Pierce are gone. Don't believe me.......ask some old timers on this board.
    There are only so many casts in life, so shut up and fish!!
  • gettinwetgettinwet Posts: 1,366 Officer
    conchydong wrote: »
    That is the key. I am not anti commercial when managed properly. At least the commercials have accountability (for the most part) through the sales process. There isn't anyway to measure recreational catches unless a honor system was implemented. This would lead to another question and perhaps a topic for another thread. How many recreational fishermen would report all of the fish harvested? Released fish should be counted also as there is a certain mortality percentage depending on fishing methods and depth.
    Perhaps a poll could be taken.

    No it isn't..........they just need an accurate estimate of the current population..........calculate what can be sustainably caught .........then implement - according to that target - seasons/bag limits that apply to all equally.............recount/redo every few years. Any fishery that cannot sustain a recreational harvest can't sustain a commercial harvest ether. Commercial harvests should be focused on lion fish and other evasive non native species even if the state has to fund it.......much cheaper than the alternative.
    There are only so many casts in life, so shut up and fish!!
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    gettinwet wrote: »
    Gill net ban. Absolute must. I fished Crystal River with my grandfather who grew up fishing there before/after and saw first hand the decline and semi recovery. It not only killed most juvenile fish - you know the undersize schoolies - all the trapped grass that got dumped killed off half the oyster beds as well.

    But the current issues are the destruction/pollution of habitat, overpopulation, poor management practices, illegal fishing.........with the first two the primary concerns..........again from first hand observation. I have wade fished the MIWR in Titusville, Fl the past 15 years.........the cold spell a few years back might have actually been a blessing.........don't know what the algae bloom now would be like without it. Spots I used to fish that were gin clear most of the year except late summer and covered with grass are now muck bottoms under three feet of murkier water. And it is not just isolated to the Northern Indian River.............most of the grass beds all the way to Ft. Pierce are gone. Don't believe me.......ask some old timers on this board.
    I was an old timer way before this board..LMAO
    How old are you, 20?
    Who was your grandfather (if we are truly going back a ways)?


    Trapped grass? Your talking about shrimp boats not gill nets and properly working roller frames don't plow up grass, seriously, lots of studies on that if you want to Google.
    You won't though..
    BTW, net ban really didn't affect shrimp boats here, Farmed Asian imports are the reasons there is no Dead Commercial food shrimping in Crystal Bay anymore, however there are three or four dozen Live Commercial and Live bait boats working nightly.

    Oyster bars here? High salinity levels and disease took most of the ones out west of Shell Island back in the 1950-60's.
    High salinity levels and saltwater intrusion are killing the rest of them east of the beach (thanks to all the Villages and other developments in the recharge area).

    You really are clueless.
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • conchydongconchydong Pompano BeachPosts: 6,902 Admiral
    gettinwet wrote: »
    No it isn't..........they just need an accurate estimate of the current population..........calculate what can be sustainably caught .........then implement - according to that target - seasons/bag limits that apply to all equally.............recount/redo every few years. Any fishery that cannot sustain a recreational harvest can't sustain a commercial harvest ether. Commercial harvests should be focused on lion fish and other evasive non native species even if the state has to fund it.......much cheaper than the alternative.

    ANumber1 is right. You really are clueless.

    “Everyone behaves badly--given the chance.”
    ― Ernest Hemingway

  • HighTidesDrifterHighTidesDrifter Posts: 105 Officer
    "Commercial harvests should be focused on lion fish and other evasive non native species even if the state had to fund it......much cheaper than the alternative." gettinwet

    Totally agree. After Trump bans commercial fishing for grouper and snapper, you all can wipe out the lionfish and tilapia. After that, if you all are brave enough, the state can put you guys to work killing the invasive snakes like the python that are taking over. Maybe somebody could make a reality show out of it like Swamp People. Wouldn't we all love watching anumber1 killing snakes? Anybody have some A & E connections? :grin
    Genesis 1:28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

    "The main vice of capitalism is the unequal distribution of prosperity. The main vice of socialism is the equal distribution of misery." -Winston Churchill
  • gettinwetgettinwet Posts: 1,366 Officer
    conchydong wrote: »
    ANumber1 is right. You really are clueless.

    No, a person that doesn't accept the reality that commercial fishing in its current state is not sustainable is either clueless.....or willingly ignorant.
    There are only so many casts in life, so shut up and fish!!
  • gettinwetgettinwet Posts: 1,366 Officer
    ANUMBER1 wrote: »
    I was an old timer way before this board..LMAO
    How old are you, 20?
    Who was your grandfather (if we are truly going back a ways)?


    Trapped grass? Your talking about shrimp boats not gill nets and properly working roller frames don't plow up grass, seriously, lots of studies on that if you want to Google.
    You won't though..
    BTW, net ban really didn't affect shrimp boats here, Farmed Asian imports are the reasons there is no Dead Commercial food shrimping in Crystal Bay anymore, however there are three or four dozen Live Commercial and Live bait boats working nightly.

    Oyster bars here? High salinity levels and disease took most of the ones out west of Shell Island back in the 1950-60's.
    High salinity levels and saltwater intrusion are killing the rest of them east of the beach (thanks to all the Villages and other developments in the recharge area).

    You really are clueless.

    I'm talking gill nets in the Crystal River backwaters........didn't see many shrimp boats kind of shallow ...........though would run across a lot of tangled gill nets because they would string them across cuts/channels so that the tides would pull fish into the nets a lot of times at night so people would run over them. They would become clogged with hundreds of pounds of grass...........you could always tell where they cleaned the nets because those would be the only places with muck.

    The oysters beds that were productive throughout my childhood were pretty much gone by the time I was a teen. We used to harvest them with oyster rakes, bag em, ice em, and the whole family would get involved shucking them. My grandfather's driveway was paved with the shells from over eight decades of his trips........and he died back in the late 80s.

    BTW - Glad to hear you are an old timer.
    There are only so many casts in life, so shut up and fish!!
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    gettinwet wrote: »
    I'm talking gill nets in the Crystal River backwaters........didn't see many shrimp boats kind of shallow ...........though would run across a lot of tangled gill nets because they would string them across cuts/channels so that the tides would pull fish into the nets a lot of times at night so people would run over them. They would become clogged with hundreds of pounds of grass...........you could always tell where they cleaned the nets because those would be the only places with muck.

    The oysters beds that were productive throughout my childhood were pretty much gone by the time I was a teen. We used to harvest them with oyster rakes, bag em, ice em, and the whole family would get involved shucking them. My grandfather's driveway was paved with the shells from over eight decades of his trips........and he died back in the late 80s.

    BTW - Glad to hear you are an old timer.
    You're living in a fantasy world...:rotflmao
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • 2WayCenter2WayCenter Posts: 225 Officer
    Florida Sportsman should transfer their URL to the commercial guys. It's 75% of what you read when you come here. Funny how some of the regional moderators will light up a thread for the slightest reason, but they let a few commercial fishermen taunt, insult and ridicule without moderation.

    Hijacked, it is of little use and no interest to me. Maybe Florida Sportsman's advertisers are more interested in reaching the commercial loudmouths that post constantly?
  • drgibbydrgibby Posts: 1,517 Captain
    2WayCenter wrote: »
    Florida Sportsman should transfer their URL to the commercial guys. It's 75% of what you read when you come here. Funny how some of the regional moderators will light up a thread for the slightest reason, but they let a few commercial fishermen taunt, insult and ridicule without moderation.

    Hijacked, it is of little use and no interest to me. Maybe Florida Sportsman's advertisers are more interested in reaching the commercial loudmouths that post constantly?

    Well Stated.
  • FletchFletch Merritt Island, FLPosts: 2,461 Moderator
    2WayCenter wrote: »
    Florida Sportsman should transfer their URL to the commercial guys. It's 75% of what you read when you come here. Funny how some of the regional moderators will light up a thread for the slightest reason, but they let a few commercial fishermen taunt, insult and ridicule without moderation.

    Hijacked, it is of little use and no interest to me. Maybe Florida Sportsman's advertisers are more interested in reaching the commercial loudmouths that post constantly?

    There is some taunting here and there on this thread but it's coming from both sides. In fact, the title of this thread is a taunt right from the get go inferring that all gulf commercial boats are rapists. Anyone with a shred of objectivity should see right through that don't you think? Should we remove the thread entirely and kill all discussion? Perhaps you are only seeing what you want to see?

    Sometimes its better to let people open their mouths and remove all doubt? :shrug
    "Ninety percent I'll spend on good times, women and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent, I'll probably waste..."
    -- Tug McGraw on getting a raise

    Get Down Fishing Charters - Port Canaveral, Florida
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    2WayCenter wrote: »
    Florida Sportsman should transfer their URL to the commercial guys. It's 75% of what you read when you come here. Funny how some of the regional moderators will light up a thread for the slightest reason, but they let a few commercial fishermen taunt, insult and ridicule without moderation.

    Hijacked, it is of little use and no interest to me. Maybe Florida Sportsman's advertisers are more interested in reaching the commercial loudmouths that post constantly?
    I respond in kind, if you have a legit inquiry I would do my best to seriously answer it but I can take it to any level you please.

    For anyone to assert that large amounts of grass from gill nets killed the oyster bars in Crystal bay is either trolling or just plain ignorant.

    My money is on the former.
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,585 Captain
    It's not so much that the commercial boats are **** the Gulf, they are depriving the nation of due payment for their profits made from harvesting our Public Trust Resource (our fish) while driving their perceived competition (us) off the water.

    Here in the Gulf of Mexico, the federal government gifted 51% of the Gulf red snapper to a few commercial fishing corporations via Catch Shares in 2006. These shares can be traded, leased or sold much like shares on Wall Street and have made a few commercial boys instant millionaires - I believe today’s market value of these shares to be 300-400 million dollars. Many of these commercial fishermen don’t even go fishing anymore - they sit at home and lease their fish to other commercial fishermen for a price of around $3/pound, and could make as much as $1 million per year simply shuffling papers. Last time I checked, the 3% cost recovery fee falls short of covering the management and enforcement of the Gulf of Mexico IFQ Program, so to add insult to injury, not only does the nation and fisheries not receive any benefit from this program, they are charging the U.S. Taxpayer for the costs associated with it. Unlike other industries that benefit from the harvest of our Public Trust Resources, such as timber and mining on public lands, oil leases, etc. The Gulf of Mexico IFQ Sea Lords don’t pay a penny in royalties to the nation.

    The last time the Gulf Council increased the Total Allowable Catch of red snapper in the Gulf, it resulted in an additional $5 million PER YEAR in free money (if the Sea Lords leased out 100% of that increase). What did the Gulf recreational anglers receive from this increase? One extra fishing day. Not really “fair and equitable” in the least. This is $5 million PER YEAR made available by the Gulf Council to ENABLE the Sea Lords to to ensure (via endless lawsuits) that their entitlement program called Catch Shares is protected and continues infinitely, to be passed on to their heirs as “assets”. Catch Shares equate to massive felony theft of our Public Trust Resources for the benefit of a few corporations at the expense of current and future Americans and need to be abolished across the board.

    Recently, the Gulf Council approved AM 40 (Sector Separation) where they split the recreational quota into 2 parts; private recs and for-hire (charter boats/headboats). Never mind that they did not have the data necessary to make an informed decision on how to split the fish - they manipulated the numbers, going back 30 years to 1986 to justify the inflated amount given to the newly formed for-hire sector. What was the main purpose for Sector Separation? Implementation of Catch Shares via IFQs/PFQs for the for-hire boats and fish tags for the private recs. The net result of implementing Catch Shares in the recreational sector (both for-hire and private rec) will be a SUBSTANTIAL loss in access to the fishery in addition to setting the stage to create revenue streams from the harvest of our recreational fish where none exist today. It has nothing to do with helping the fish stocks, the fishermen, or the nation itself, despite their propaganda claiming otherwise.

    Here is a plan of action that I believe would result in the best benefit to the nation;

    1) Reauthorize Magnuson prohibiting implementation of Catch Shares in any fishery. Remove management of the Gulf fisheries (recreational AND commercial) from the control of NOAA Fisheries and give the management to the coastal states via HR 3094.

    2) Allow the states to manage the fish landed off of their coastlines out to 200 miles, and give them the power to set their own seasons/bag limits based on what the ecosystems, fisheries biomass, and level of effort found off of their coastlines will allow on a sustainable basis. Currently, fishermen in Texas are being managed by what is happening off of Florida - it’s absurd. It’s analogous to Texas deer hunters being managed by deer populations in Alabama - there is no scientific, ecological, nor economic rationale for managing the Gulf fisheries as a whole.

    3) Give the states the authority to regulate and determine the level of recreational AND commercial fishing off of their coastlines. Currently, in the Gulf red snapper commercial fishery, most of the IFQ owners are from Florida but they mostly fish off of Texas/Louisiana. This results in a skewed catch % in the western Gulf, favoring commercial harvest over recreational access - I would submit that the current overall 51.5% recreational/48.5% commercial split is more like 35% recreational/65% commercial off of Texas/Louisiana. The determination whether or not this is in the best interests of each state should be made at the state level - NOT the federal level where they have an obvious bias AGAINST Texas/Louisiana fishermen.

    4) Provide the necessary funds for the states to conduct their own stock assessments and landings/effort data (see number 5 below). Currently, it is apparent that the NMFS would prefer to present a scenario that there is a “crisis” when in actuality there is none. Their assessments do not include counting fish found around artificial reefs and oil platforms - seems to me that if you want to provide an accurate accounting of the amount of fish swimming out there that you go to where the fish live (reefs/platforms). However, the federal fisheries managers do not share that logic and intentionally avoid reefs/platforms when counting their fish. They do claim that fish are counted from these reef/platforms, but there is no realistic way to determine how many fish are actually swimming in the water by counting dead fish on the dock. All 5 Gulf states have already begun improving their landings/efforts data through their own systems in place since it has become apparent that the NMFS is either unwilling or unable to provide accurate data here as well.

    5) Require that commercial Sea Lords bid on leasing their quota directly from the state fisheries commissions each year by the fishermen ACTUALLY doing the fishing - the nation deserves a return on its investment in our Public Trust Resources. Even if they paid only $1 per pound each year, this would provide millions of dollars EACH YEAR that could be used to help the fisheries; better data, habitat enhancement, enforcement, etc. In 2016, this would have raised over $6 million from the commercial Sea Lords alone - monies derived from the harvest of our fisheries dedicated directly to helping our fisheries instead of private bank accounts. The current price for leasing red snapper is $3.00 to $3.25/pound, and the Sea Lords themselves have already demonstrated that leasing the fish to harvest is a viable business model - imagine that if they paid that to the government, the monies raised would be $18 million to $19.5 million PER YEAR.

    6) Prohibit leasing between fishermen which would take away the “legal defense fund” that the current system promotes and enables by providing “free money” through leasing their shares. It also would halt the current move to implement Catch Shares in the recreational fisheries so that the commercial interests could lease the recreational fishermen “their fish” through inter-sector trading (which is undoubtably coming). If the environmental/commercial interests get their way, the days of a recreational fisherman going out, catching a fish and placing in his cooler “for free” are coming to an end. He will be required to pay SOMEBODY in order to take that fish home to his family to eat - remember, these fish are our Public Trust Resource, and nobody should have the right to garner exclusive harvest/profit privileges over other Americans. It should be an open access fishery, where nobody is given ownership rights, and is open to all who wish to venture out and enjoy our vast Public Trust Resources.

    7) Enact accountability programs between the states to ensure that each state manages their fish properly by not allowing overfishing to occur, protecting fish stocks while providing reasonable access to ensure that the fisheries are sustainable now and for generations to come!

    Contact your Congressmen and educate them why we need to reauthorize Magnuson and support HR 3094 so that the Nation, the American fishermen, and American coastal communities can receive maximum benefit from accessing our fisheries instead of just a handful of greedy corporations. Catch Shares have caused BILLIONS of dollars in damage to our coastal economies in the last 10 years - it's time to do chemo/radiation/surgery on the cancer called Catch Shares now, before our fishing future becomes terminally ill.
  • 2WayCenter2WayCenter Posts: 225 Officer
    Hijacked with your help.

    The initial poster was not calling the commercial fisherman rapists. He was calling out the convoluted and corrupt system that "allows" them to take so much and us so little.

    Again, if I were an advertiser I would raise my eyebrows. You have quite an objective (sarcasm intended) cesspool here Mr. Fletch. Congratulations. Sad, given The Florida Sportsman's past glory.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    gettinwet wrote: »
    For a sustainable commercial fishery yes..................for a properly managed recreational fishery no.........just like red grouper, swordfish, tuna, etc., etc..........
    So cut the commercials out and without proper accounting of the rec catch you'll get maybe 10 more days...lol
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    2WayCenter wrote: »
    Hijacked with your help.

    The initial poster was not calling the commercial fisherman rapists. He was calling out the convoluted and corrupt system that "allows" them to take so much and us so little.

    Again, if I were an advertiser I would raise my eyebrows. You have quite an objective (sarcasm intended) cesspool here Mr. Fletch. Congratulations. Sad, given The Florida Sportsman's past glory.
    Y'all take more gags/ARS/cobia/mahi/mangrove than we do anyway..
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
  • FletchFletch Merritt Island, FLPosts: 2,461 Moderator
    2WayCenter wrote: »
    Hijacked with your help.

    The initial poster was not calling the commercial fisherman rapists. He was calling out the convoluted and corrupt system that "allows" them to take so much and us so little.

    Again, if I were an advertiser I would raise my eyebrows. You have quite an objective (sarcasm intended) cesspool here Mr. Fletch. Congratulations. Sad, given The Florida Sportsman's past glory.

    It's okay. My digestive system won't function without huge doses of sarcasm. Dump as much as you want - I can take it. :)

    Speaking purely as an individual who does not work for FS nor is involved with their advertising decisions, I see nothing wrong with debating whether you agree with commercial fishing or not. But I think its disingenuous to suggest that we have a forum open only to those who disagree with it. This does not change or alter FS's position on the matter. I think it's obvious that their interests lie primarily in that of the recreational fisherman. But to close commercial fisherman's comments out entirely would accelerate division amongst all fisherman - recreational, comm or charter. I personally don't think that's a good thing.

    The original point I tried to make, and I still think it's a good one, is that as the system is set up RIGHT NOW, commercial fishermen provide the most accurate and timely method of sampling within just about any given fishery. This, in my opinion, benefits EVERYONE involved in a particular fishery. Imagine being on the Atlantic side of the equation where the ONLY harvest/sampling of ARS comes from the same people (S. Atlantic Council) who are imposing restrictions on us. They essentially control the entire fishery from development of the regression model (and all of its assumptions) to harvesting/sampling the inputs to the model to formulation, implementation and enforcement of the regulations based on that model. They hold ALL the cards.

    Tom makes some good points about Catch Shares. There are those in the Gulf who received tremendous gifts in terms of initial allocation and I'm sure - right or wrong - they will do whatever they can to protect their interests. I'm not in their shoes however so who am I to say really?

    For the record, I am against catch shares but I am not against commercial fishing in general. If it is managed properly and "fairly", I think there's room for comms, recs and charter operators. Maybe not in ALL fisheries but in many. I am against commercial fishing that employs overly destructive tactics. For example, as much as I like fresh shrimp and scallops, it's hard for me to accept huge nets dragging across the bottom and the resulting by catch that is all too common.
    "Ninety percent I'll spend on good times, women and Irish whiskey. The other ten percent, I'll probably waste..."
    -- Tug McGraw on getting a raise

    Get Down Fishing Charters - Port Canaveral, Florida
  • 2WayCenter2WayCenter Posts: 225 Officer
    You should post your opinions under a different user name. Have a backbone and moderate the group.

    I did not suggest that you "close commercial fisherman's comments out entirely".

    Don't read between the lines to paint rec guys calling people racist or question my objectivity. I am the guy Florida Sportsman advertisers want here. The one with a $200,000 boat, $20,000 in tackle and that much in marina dues, gas and myriad other expense associated with fishing.

    We don't make are living at this, so we are certain to be less than perfect on the details. We don't have the time or resources to pad political campaigns, or make in person visits to our elected representatives. A little "objectivity" that balances to our side of the boat would be in order here. Instead, you have cultivated a group dominated by keyboard warrior commercial guys who engage in circular arguments.
  • Tom HiltonTom Hilton Posts: 1,585 Captain
    I too think that commercial fishermen certainly have a place at the table - just that they shouldn't be the ONLY ones at the table while others are prohibited their place 97% of the year like it is now.

    Commercial fishermen should not being using monies gained from profits harvesting our Public Trust Resources to use against American fishermen (via endless lawsuits) for the purpose of excluding them from those same Public Trust Resources.
  • conchydongconchydong Pompano BeachPosts: 6,902 Admiral
    Fletch wrote: »
    It's okay. My digestive system won't function without huge doses of sarcasm. Dump as much as you want - I can take it. :)

    Speaking purely as an individual who does not work for FS nor is involved with their advertising decisions, I see nothing wrong with debating whether you agree with commercial fishing or not. But I think its disingenuous to suggest that we have a forum open only to those who disagree with it. This does not change or alter FS's position on the matter. I think it's obvious that their interests lie primarily in that of the recreational fisherman. But to close commercial fisherman's comments out entirely would accelerate division amongst all fisherman - recreational, comm or charter. I personally don't think that's a good thing.

    The original point I tried to make, and I still think it's a good one, is that as the system is set up RIGHT NOW, commercial fishermen provide the most accurate and timely method of sampling within just about any given fishery. This, in my opinion, benefits EVERYONE involved in a particular fishery. Imagine being on the Atlantic side of the equation where the ONLY harvest/sampling of ARS comes from the same people (S. Atlantic Council) who are imposing restrictions on us. They essentially control the entire fishery from development of the regression model (and all of its assumptions) to harvesting/sampling the inputs to the model to formulation, implementation and enforcement of the regulations based on that model. They hold ALL the cards.

    Tom makes some good points about Catch Shares. There are those in the Gulf who received tremendous gifts in terms of initial allocation and I'm sure - right or wrong - they will do whatever they can to protect their interests. I'm not in their shoes however so who am I to say really?

    For the record, I am against catch shares but I am not against commercial fishing in general. If it is managed properly and "fairly", I think there's room for comms, recs and charter operators. Maybe not in ALL fisheries but in many. I am against commercial fishing that employs overly destructive tactics. For example, as much as I like fresh shrimp and scallops, it's hard for me to accept huge nets dragging across the bottom and the resulting by catch that is all too common.

    :Agree Good post.

    Many who enjoy going to a seafood restaurant and order grouper fingers, conch fritters, and crab cakes then spew hatred against commercial fishermen are hypocrites IMO. Even if the wild product is imported. Best for recreationals and commercials to work together to find solutions than to be divided.

    “Everyone behaves badly--given the chance.”
    ― Ernest Hemingway

  • ANUMBER1ANUMBER1 Posts: 11,607 AG
    2WayCenter wrote: »
    You should post your opinions under a different user name. Have a backbone and moderate the group.

    I did not suggest that you "close commercial fisherman's comments out entirely".

    Don't read between the lines to paint rec guys calling people racist or question my objectivity. I am the guy Florida Sportsman advertisers want here. The one with a $200,000 boat, $20,000 in tackle and that much in marina dues, gas and myriad other expense associated with fishing.

    We don't make are living at this, so we are certain to be less than perfect on the details. We don't have the time or resources to pad political campaigns, or make in person visits to our elected representatives. A little "objectivity" that balances to our side of the boat would be in order here. Instead, you have cultivated a group dominated by keyboard warrior commercial guys who engage in circular arguments.
    so you own a Bayliner??

    Since I only commercially crab these days I am as much of a rec sportsman as you.

    I don't rec fish much except for freshwater but chose to pursue other fairly expensive outdoor hobbies.:)


    257_zpsfcxmmmrs.jpg
    002.jpg 102.5K
    I am glad to only be a bird hunter with bird dogs...being a shooter or dog handler or whatever other niche exists to separate appears to generate far too much about which to worry.
Sign In or Register to comment.